Sunday, March 1, 2015

Plot in Movie Titles and Death Bed: The Bed That Eats (1977)



One of the toughest parts of creating something is finding the right name for it.  When two people agree to have a child together, they spend a lot of time debating what to name him or her.  A studio may take time to ponder over whether or not a script’s title is good enough for marketing or if they need to change it to something else.  Hell, even the writer spent time trying to figure out what the right title of the script would be.  The thing that all of these people have in common is that they want to find something that stands out while also representing what is being named.  They don’t want to be too vague because it won’t stand out.  John Smith is a very common name that you wouldn’t want to name your child because of how bland it sounds.  People also don’t want to get too specific with names.  Look at Jason Lee, for example.  He named his kid Pilot Inspektor (yes, with the k).  The kid has a crazy name that will likely haunt him for the rest of his life.  Or, let’s get even more specific.  Chad Johnson changed his name to Chad Ochocinco for a while, to match his jersey number.  What a goof.

I’ve already spent an entire post summarizing the different ways to name a movie.  This week I want to dive deeper into one of the ways.  That would be the specific names that many movies, notably bad movies, have.  These are names that are comparable to how obvious Chad Ochocinco is.  In fact, they might be more obvious because they’re in English.  I want to write about movie titles that perfectly describe what you would be watching.  I want to compare ones that make the experience of the movie better to the cases that set your expectations too high.  There is a difference between the two.

Of course, I should start by talking about a movie that fits the criteria for specific titling.  The one that immediately comes to mind for most people would probably be Snakes on a Plane.  The movie was one of the most mainstream movies to lay out its plot in its name.  And it did so very bluntly.  The movie ended up being about a plane with snakes on it.  That’s exactly what it ended up being.  Samuel L. Jackson and the other passengers of a plane had to fight off snakes.  The people who went to see it wanted to watch it because of the name.  Most of them, myself included, found it to be dumb fun.  That’s what you want out of this kind of movie.  Respectable movies that try to stay on the good side of the film spectrum tend to have subtler names.  They use metaphors or character names.  They use places, things, or events.  They tend not to spell out their plot in the title.  But b-movies do.

The reason that the plot of a movie is sometimes used as the title for b-movies is that the crazy plots are many times what gets people to watch them.  B-movies don’t tend to be the serious prestige movies or the mainstream, multi-million dollar movies.  They’re mostly just an hour and a half of weird story and genre tales for people looking for something to fill their time.  In many cases, they play in limited theaters or festivals, then quickly move to home video.  For me, these movies are a large source of entertainment.  For most others, they are something to watch once in a while when drinking with friends.  What better to do while drunk than watch some stupid fun movie?  In a world where “Don’t judge a book by its cover” has been all but forgotten because of oversaturation, the title is the easiest way to tell people about a movie.  Instead of reading a plot summary or looking the movie up online, a potential viewer can know what the movie is by simply reading the title.  Look at Snakes on a Plane.  You already know what you’re going to get.

One thing that must be considered when coming up with a title is how it will affect the expectations of the people who decide to watch it.  The more insane the concept in the title, the better the movie needs to be for the concept to succeed.  Although movies like Snakes on a Plane or the rip-off Snakes on a Train tell you what is going to happen in their titles, they are still fairly simplistic and grounded.  The snakes will be in those transportation vessels.  The title seems like something plausible.  It keeps the expectations lowered.  As much as people think “Wow! That title sounds dumb and fun!” they don’t get their hopes up like they would for a more fantastical idea.  If the movie is good, they will enjoy it.  If it’s bad, they don’t have the overwhelming disappointment.

Let me go back to Snakes on a Train for a minute.  Yes, the train one.  I watched it for the Sunday “Bad” Movies so it makes more sense for me to go in depth with that one than what it was cashing in on.  Snakes on a Train doesn’t set the bar high on expectations and hopes of the viewer.  There are going to be snakes on a train.  It delivers on that promise.  Since the concept of snakes being on a train is rather simplistic, the writer did not need to come up with a way to justify that happening.  The writer did that anyway, making the snakes into a physical manifestation of something inside the passengers, but it is simply going beyond the promise.  And the movie had entertainment to go along with the concept.  The snakes move, the people move, and that caused visual action all around.  All of this is helped by the core idea of the movie being simple.  Snakes being on a train is not a strange combination at all.  It doesn’t raise expectations, and makes the audience set their bar of entertainment a little lower.

The problem with this style of titling is when the insanity of the title is what catches someone’s eye.  The title would have to be something that seems crazy when you read it.  The people who want to see it go into it wondering how the title can be fully realized in the movie.  They are hoping for something extremely dumb but also quite entertaining.  If the entertainment value is non-existent, they feel more disappointed than if a more realistic movie lacks entertainment.  A crazy idea should at least be fun to play around with.  If it isn’t, then what was the point of making the movie?

That brings us to this week’s Sunday “Bad” Movie, Death Bed: The Bed That Eats.  It is one of the more underwhelming instances of a movie with a title that tells you what it will be.  I saw the title and immediately thought “This is going to be great!  A bed that eats people!”  I added the people in my own head.  It was an assumption, and it was the right one.  The movie was exactly what I thought.  It was a bed that ate people.  It did also eat an apple, some fried chicken, flowers, and drink a bottle of wine.  What I didn’t realize about the title, however, was how not great the movie would actually be.  Beds are stationary things.  They aren’t meant to move.  In the case of Death Bed: The Bed That Eats, the bed never really moved.  A blanket slid once in a while and, yeah, the bed ended up outdoors a couple times, but it never moved itself like a predator stalking prey.  It sat still and people had to be on it for anything to happen.  There wasn’t enough actual action to be entertaining.  The bed was motionless, as was the movie’s pacing.  My expectations had been set too high and I was in for one of my least favourite movies in a while.

If a movie’s concept is more outlandish, it takes more skill to properly navigate how to flesh it out.  A movie about a bed that eats people needs a talented touch in order for the bed to feel like a credible threat and the movie to have some form of entertainment.  It is much tougher than a movie like Snakes on a Train where all that is needed is to put snakes in the confinement of a train with some passengers.  Both movies use their titles to sell their plots to consumers, but the one with the more outrageous title is the one that needs to try harder to be accepted by the people watching it.  It can be a very difficult like to walk.  However, when a ludicrous sounding idea gets pulled off, it can make for one joyful experience.

Titles are an art form unto themselves.  It can be difficult to come up with the right name for something.  You can think for a long time before choosing one that perfectly encapsulates what you are naming.  In the case of b-movies, it is easier if using the plot.  There are setbacks to this method, such as the heightened expectations of the more out there ideas, but this method allows the b-movies to compete with the more mainstream movies when featured on store shelves and Netflix listings.  I’m all for that.  If the smaller companies can find a way to get their movies watched in the vast landscape of big budget summer action fare, I can’t blame them for using it.  I adore that they use it.  It’s given me some great movies to watch.  Maybe it has given you some, too.
There are a few notes to put in here:

  • Here is the post for Snakeson a Train.
  • Other movies I’ve covered where the title basically spells out the plot in a similar way to the movies I’ve mentioned are Big Ass Spider!, Nazis at the Center of the Earth, Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter, and 30 Nights of Paranormal Activity with the Devil Inside the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.
  • Have you seen Death Bed: The Bed That Eats?  What do you think of movies that spell out their basic plot in the title?  If you have any comments, there’s a comment section below for your use.
  • You can also suggest movies for the Sunday “Bad” Movies in the comments section.  I recently completed the schedule through September, but I’m always looking for more suggestions for future scheduling.  If you don’t want to suggest in the comments, you can find me on Twitter or email me at sundaybadmovies@gmail.com.
  • Next week, the movie will be The Million Dollar Duck.  I’ve seen it, I’ve questioned it, I still need to write about it.  See you then.

No comments:

Post a Comment